Bombay High Court Constitutes Committee To Examine Kopeshwar Temple Restoration Works, 'Humongous' Expenditure On Unrelated Projects
The Bombay High Court recently constituted a committee of five advocates to visit the 12th Century built historic Kopeshwar Temple in Khidrapur, Kolhapur and conduct an independent fact-finding exercise to ascertain the present status of the temple's infrastructure so that the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) could be asked to take proper steps for the resurrection of the said temple....
The Bombay High Court recently constituted a committee of five advocates to visit the 12th Century built historic Kopeshwar Temple in Khidrapur, Kolhapur and conduct an independent fact-finding exercise to ascertain the present status of the temple's infrastructure so that the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) could be asked to take proper steps for the resurrection of the said temple.
A division bench of Justice Milind Jadhav and Justice Nandesh Deshpande appointed a committee comprising of Ritesh Thobade, Rugwed Kinkar, Utkarsha Desai, Siddharth Shitole and Bhargavi Patil.
"This heritage temple is situated in a very unique place. It has a rich culture and history by virtue of its location. Whatever bye laws and rules are required to be made have to be made from the point of view of the river which surrounds the temple on almost three sides keeping in mind the flood situation, since we are informed that Khidrapur town and the temple site is a 100% flood-prone area. In 2019, we were informed that the entire Khidrapur heritage temple, including all five structures of the temple, was under water up to a height of 12 feet. We just hope that such a situation never arises again. Since such a situation did arise in 2019, certain damage was done. That apart, the weather, wear and tear, and the inevitable monsoons which the temple has faced have also weakened the structure. All that we would say is that the ASI and the structural engineers should immediately apply their mind to the immediate restoration and resurrection issues that are required," the bench observed in the order passed on August 3.
The bench was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) highlighting various issues with regards to the Kopeshwar temple's 'poor infrastructure' and the 'expenses' being made by the Maharashtra Government to other ancillary works rather than focusing on preserving this temple, which is a heritage site.
The judges pointed out that the Kopeshwar Temple is a 12th century architecture marvel dedicated to Lord Shiva built by the Shilahara dynasty between 1109 – 1178 CE and its sits on the bank of Krishna river and is famous for its intricate stone carving and unique detailing. It is built using heavy volcano black basalt rock from the Sahayadri mountain range brought via the river during floods. It is renowned for its unique circular open-topped (Swarg Mandap) intricate stone craving and a rare joint shrine where both Shiva and Vishnu are venerated. The bench further noted that the Swarg Mandap is supported by 48 excessively carved pillars with centre-locking holes in the centre looking up at the sky. The entire outer basement and exterior of the temple is supported by stone carving of 92 elephant facing outwards along with significant mythological stories depicted in the carving. In all, there are 108 pillars supporting entire temple structure.
"There are two huge cracks developed in the ceiling; one in the inner sanctum (Garbhagriha) and one at the entrance, which are noticeable to the naked eye. On the south side of the temple, immediately outside the Garbhagriha, there is huge seepage of water, over the entire wall, because of which the entire wall is completely wet. The Deputy Executive Engineer also agrees that these issues need immediate attention," the bench observed.
The other three issues which plague the world heritage site and require immediate attention pertain to the outer Swarga Mandap, which is supported by 48 pillars and it is given to understand that even if one of these 48 pillars is damaged or gives way, the entire Swarga Mandap may collapse.
"Immediate attention is required for the restoration of three such affected pillars: Two of the pillars, due to their load bearing capacity and weight, due to weather, wear and tear, and exposure to the monsoon, have tilted slightly. These two pillars that have tilted require immediate attention and resurrection. The third pillar has, in fact, virtually given way, as has been noticed by the AS and the ASI has put up metal props to arrest the fall of the said third pillar," the bench noted.
Further the bench noted that the lady ASI Guards have been deployed at the entry/exit points of the temple, who the judges noted, were 'virtually' unable to control the ingress of cows, which are brought by local residents, on certain days for worship purposes.
"Such practices need to be stopped. We were also informed by the Police Patil that many visitors take their pet dogs inside the temple and are not stopped by the guards. Whenever we visit heritage sites in our country, we are inundated with huge plaques and signboards of the ASI setting out applicable rules and regulations. These signboards and plaques ought to be displayed at appropriate places outside the temple. These were absent; rather, they were placed inside and were in a very bad, dilapidated and broken condition. Therefore, all that we have impressed upon the ASI is to see that appropriate plaques and boards depicting the rules and regulations of the ASI for venturing into heritage sites are displayed outside the temple. We are sure that the ASI will take appropriate steps in that regard and accordingly apprise us on the next date of hearing," the bench said.
Further as regards to the nearly Rs 101 crores budget sanctioned by the State, the bench noted that at least Rs 10 crores was being used for construction of a compound wall, which the authorities claimed that some amount of it it would also be used for additional structures which are ancillary to the wall including a ramp for the disabled persons, pathway etc. The bench, however, seemed unimpressed with the said expenditure.
"Though we are not experts, an element of doubt has been raised from all quarters about the expenditure. What we expected of the Government was to tell us the extent of the work to be done. This is not done. A humongous expenditure of ₹10 Crores proposed to be incurred on the compound wall is something which is beyond comprehension to a prudent man, and more so when the amount is drawn from the State's exchequer. The primary purpose undoubtedly would be to preserve the temple first which is not even on the horizon. What we have observed, and what is also agreed to by the Deputy Executive Engineer is that the outer compound wall is fully raised, but the construction of some inner compound wall is going on. We would like to know how this has been done and to what extent it will be done, so that we can consider the justification for incurring such a humongous expenditure of more than ₹10 Crores," the judges remarked.
The second expenditure of approximately Rs 12.84 crores, being expended by the State through the Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation was towards the construction of a river Ghat adjacent to the temple. The bench noted that at first blush, one may consider it necessary since the temple is situated in a unique position, being surrounded by a U-shaped Krishna River flowing around it, and on the opposite bank of the said Krishna River lies the boundary of Karnataka.
"However, we have reservations about accepting such a humongous expenditure towards the Ghat (or river bank), which is admittedly at a distance of 200 meters from the temple as confirmed and informed by the Deputy Executive Engineer before us. When a substantial amount is set aside for the preservation of a heritage relic, whether spending a humongous amount of ₹12.84 Crores on the development of a river Ghat which is in the nature of a public development lying beyond and outside the scope of the heritage relic and the temple and situated at a distance of about 200 meters, is not at all feasible and prima facie such an expenditure cannot be approved from ₹44 Crores out of the ₹101Crores sanctioned for restoration of the heritage temple," the bench observed.
The bench noted that at least Rs 44 crores from the Rs 101 crores have been specifically allotted for the preservation and resurrection of this very heritage site. It, therefore, opined that one-third of the said amount cannot be allowed to be spent on a public-purpose development which is 200 meters away from the temple, which probably, may not have any nexus with the world heritage site.
"The entire purpose would be defeated by making such an expenditure on a public development, which undoubtedly is the responsibility of the State and for which the State will have to take appropriate steps in accordance with law. The temple funds cannot be diverted in this fashion. The temple itself needs substantial funds for its preservation and restoration which one yet to be ascertained," the bench opined.
The bench therefore, appointed the five-member all advocates' committee and has ordered them to visit the temple site, conduct a proper inspection of the infrastructure and furnish a report of the same on the next date of hearing.
The bench has adjourned the hearing in the PIL till August 31.
Appearance:
Advocates Yuvraj Narvankar, Vinayak Belgaonkar and Anushka Mule appeared for the Petitioner.
Advocates Anand Kulkarni, Divya Arvind Pawar, Shivraj Jagdale, Rahul R and Vijay Killedar represented the Union of India.
Assistant Government Pleader Siddheshwar Kalel represented the State.
Advocates Kedar Lad, DV Sutar and Reshma Adnaik represented Other Respondents.
Advocates Manoj Patil, Shubham R. Dhenge and Ankita Mali represented the Intervener.
Case Title: Prashant Vasantrao Salunkhe vs Union of India (Public Interest Litigation 20 of 2026)